MR. ROHRBACH
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Opposing counsel |
15
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Representative |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Ms. Chapell
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
90 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
22 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Opposing counsel |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Professional adversarial |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Opposing counsel |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Gill Velez
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Opposing counsel |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Co counsel |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
your Honor
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Supervisory Investigator Brown
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Representation |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
William Brown
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Tracy Chapell
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-10 | Witness testimony | Janine Gill Velez is called as a witness by the Government, sworn in, and begins her testimony un... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Attorneys and a judge discuss how to phrase language from an indictment concerning the age of a v... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A court proceeding where attorneys argue about the scope of a witness's upcoming testimony. | Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A legal argument between attorneys and a judge regarding whether Government Exhibit 824, containi... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | William Brown is called as a witness for the government, sworn in, and begins direct examination ... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A court hearing where attorneys and the judge discuss procedural matters, including a sequestrati... | Courtroom in the Southern D... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion between attorneys and a judge regarding the finalization of jury instructions. Speci... | Courtroom in the Southern D... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A court hearing where procedural matters were discussed between the judge and attorneys. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion between the Court and government counsel (Mr. Rohrbach) regarding jury instructions ... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion about the procedural handling of redacted photographic evidence during a trial. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A legal discussion during a court proceeding to determine the scope of questioning for a witness ... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | The court reconvenes after a recess, the jury is brought in, and the government calls its witness... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A court hearing where counsel provides updates on an investigation and discusses the witness list... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A court hearing where attorneys argue the relevance of evidence. The case number is 1:20-cr-00330... | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion between the Court and attorneys about a potential stipulation regarding the ownershi... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Direct examination of witness Ms. Chapell by Mr. Rohrbach, with reference to Government Exhibits ... | Courtroom (unspecified) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion in court regarding trial logistics. | courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion during a court proceeding about procedural matters related to expert testimony and t... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Direct examination of Ms. Chapell regarding her role as a Senior Paralegal at Federal Express, he... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A court hearing for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE where arguments were made regarding the defendant's mo... | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A court proceeding where Mr. Rohrbach discusses admitting a deposition transcript as evidence. | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A court discussion regarding the admissibility of a witness's testimony. Ms. Sternheim argues tha... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A legal argument took place concerning the admissibility of a household manual and a contact book... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A legal discussion between an attorney (Mr. Rohrbach) and the judge (The Court) about the proper ... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion between the court and attorneys regarding the specific wording of jury instructions ... | Southern District Court | View |
DOJ-OGR-00011645.jpg
A page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between the prosecution (Mr. Rohrbach), the defense (Ms. Menninger), and the Judge regarding expert witness Mr. Flatley. The discussion focuses on the scope of Mr. Flatley's expertise, specifically regarding forensic principles, digital document storage, and metadata, and whether proper notice was given to the defense regarding his opinions. The Judge instructs that any differing expert opinions on these technical matters must be noticed.
DOJ-OGR-00011644.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, dated August 10, 2022) involving a legal debate over witness testimony. Ms. Menninger argues that the government did not provide sufficient notice regarding the scope of Mr. Flatley's testimony concerning the extraction of user data and metadata, claiming the '3500 material' was insufficient. Mr. Rohrbach responds that while they view Flatley primarily as a fact witness, they provided expert notice due to the blurred lines between fact and expert testimony in this technical context.
DOJ-OGR-00011643.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The transcript captures a discussion between the judge, Ms. Menninger, and Mr. Rohrbach regarding the rules for disclosing expert testimony and the scope of evidence contained on several hard drives marked as exhibits. The attorneys debate the government's representations about which documents will be used, and Mr. Rohrbach clarifies that a witness, Mr. Kelso, will testify on the general principles of document creation.
DOJ-OGR-00011642.jpg
This document is a partial court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022, discussing the anticipated testimony of Mr. Flatley. His testimony concerns the retrieval of metadata from devices seized from Epstein's home, and the possibility of Mr. Kelso serving as a rebuttal witness. The government and defense are preparing for this testimony and related disclosures, with Mr. Flatley having given similar testimony in other cases.
Admissibility of Evidence
Discussion regarding whether personnel forms constitute hearsay or business records.
Surprise at receiving the defendant's filing.
Mr. Rohrbach mentions a letter his side sent, which indicated they were surprised to receive a filing from the defendant.
Insurance records
Mr. Rohrbach states he will 'go have a conversation with Ms. Gill about this' (referring to records).
Scope of evidence and examination regarding investigation...
Mr. Rohrbach argues to the court, disagreeing with Mr. Everdell, that while the defense can cross-examine witnesses about who was present during certain events, they cannot call a case agent in their direct case to question investigative steps that were not taken, citing the Watson and Brady cases.
Admissibility of Evidence (Exhibit 823)
Discussion regarding the relevance of Sky Roberts' employment records and phone numbers to link Virginia Roberts to Mar-a-Lago.
Scheduling
Discussion regarding delaying Brian's testimony.
Direct Examination
Questioning regarding the authenticity of personnel records for Sky Roberts.
Admissibility of exhibits 823 and 824
Oral argument regarding whether exhibit 824 adds value beyond 823 and the need to speak with Ms. Gill.
Jury Instructions
Discussion regarding instructions for alleged victim Kate and New Mexico law.
Jury Instructions / Closing Arguments
Discussion regarding the 'empty chair' argument and government motivations.
Admissibility of testimony regarding photos found during ...
Discussion clarifying if the witness can testify about seeing photos of celebrities and nude artwork without the government introducing the physical photos as exhibits.
Expert Witness Notice / Rule 16
Discussion regarding the sufficiency of the government's notice concerning Mr. Flatley's expert opinions and the defense's obligations to review provided materials.
Direct Examination
Legal examination in court
Direct Examination
Questioning regarding the authenticity of a personnel action notice for Sky Roberts.
Jury Instructions
Argument regarding the definition of persuasion, inducement, and enticement to travel.
Direct Examination
Questioning regarding the identity of Green Lake Lodge and authentication of photos.
Direct Examination
Testimony regarding employment at FedEx and knowledge of billing invoice generation.
Verification of forms at Mar-a-Lago
Mr. Rohrbach interviewed Ms. Gill regarding whether Mar-a-Lago independently verifies information on forms.
Argument for admitting Exhibit 52
Mr. Rohrbach states a plan to submit a letter on the night of the hearing to articulate the theory for why the Court should admit Exhibit 52 based on current evidence.
Jury instructions on 'dominant purpose'
Mr. Rohrbach argues to the judge that the law only requires a criminal purpose to be 'one of the dominant purposes' of a trip, not the sole or a sufficient purpose. He references legal precedents 'Sand' and 'Miller' to support his argument that the current instruction is not in error and that an alternative interpretation adds an unnecessary requirement.
Admissibility of testimony regarding photos in Epstein's ...
Mr. Rohrbach asks the Court for clarification regarding the government's plan to question a witness about photos of celebrities and nude women in Epstein's house, without presenting the photos as exhibits. The Court indicates it sees no issue with the question but reserves judgment on admitting any exhibits.
Identification of Government Exhibit 802
Mr. Rohrbach questions witness Ms. Chapell to identify Government Exhibit 802. Ms. Chapell confirms she recognizes it as an invoice on Jeffrey E. Epstein's account and that it is an accurate copy of a version held by FedEx.
Redactions
Discussion regarding the docketing of a letter with proposed redactions.
Objection to a question
Mr. Rohrbach objects to a question on the grounds that it is attenuated from any notion of bias or motive (a '401' objection).
Response to application
Drafting response expected by lunch break.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity